After shooting with my OM-D for about six months, I have become accustomed to its size. When I use my D200 now, it seems huge.

Same with Four Thirds versus Micro Four Thirds. But sometimes that HUGENESS is wanted, not the least of which is a nice optical viewfinder.

When I go to meetups and see people with full frame cameras and lenses, I can’t imagine lugging that equipment around all day. Micro Four Thirds cameras are already good enough for most purposes, and they will get dramatically better in the near future. The grass is perfectly green on my side of the m4/3 fence.

~~~~~

Yes, smaller cameras are changing the market and most will be happy with them as they get better (if they aren't already). But Canon and Nikon are doing mirrorless too. I just don't forecast death, and certainly not when they are still hungry to keep pace with lens developments.

I don't regard Micro Four Thirds as the be-all and end-all for cameras and sensor sizes either. What I see happening in the next few years is far more sensitive sensors and far less light being wasted before it reaches the sensor. Plus a whole lot more liquid lens action, much like our eyes.

I see Nikon's 1-inch sensor choice as having far less critics in future because of far less quality compromises as these new technologies ramp up. More will say that Nikon were probably on-the-money with their mirorless sensor size and I see other manufacturers doing serious quality pics with smaller sensors than Micro Four Thirds.

In other words, I don't think we've seen the last of the mirrorless formats.